Harvard Law Women Says Blacks Are Less Intelligent

Pure garbage

 

I never understand how these arguments on intelligence go on so long without people first defining it. These discussions go on with intelligence and I.Q. being used interchangeably.
Seems you would first have to define the terms and THEN explain their processes....which then leads to the next problem, IMO.
If you don't know the process of intelligence, what value is it's so-called measurement and any discussion of who is or isn't intelligent? How does one even reason that because there are physical differences there are differences in "intelligence". I'm not saying there is or there isn't, but could someone please show a correlation.

Without 'trying' to make this a long post i'll just say this: I think terms like "intelligence" and "talent" are like bogeyman terms blown way outa proportion to explain processes we have no clue and are too lazy to examine.
Someone says another is talented...then what...and why does one say another is more talented? Some1 paints with more skill than I do....eh.. I don't know how it happened, so I say that the other person is more talented....whooptido! All I really know is that for whatever reason that person paints more skillfully than I do..I dont know why.....but I think I do...s/he's more talented!! Aha! I've got it! Now i've I'm just gonna attach this term to everyone who does something at a certain level....nevermind I've never bothered to understand the situation.
Some1 tells me that one should perform at a certain level and gives it a name and then I embue the name with all sorts of importance and throw it around like I have half an inkling to its nature. Some smart guy in a lab says its this...so, ya know...it must be this and I must value it as such!
One identifies a pattern and tries to live up to it, one doesn't..one concludes one is not so intelligent nor talented...Does that mean things like talent are simply efficient copying of patterns one is told to immitate?

When one says another is more talented, does that make 1 put "more effort" into what one is doing or does one become lazy because one has concluded that the other is simply born better OR does one examine the way one has been going on...cause ya know....effort may be the last thing needed if the route one is taking is confused...
?????

 

Stirring the pot and baiting is alive and well in this one.

 

I am ^ reading this post.

 

fixed

 

HA!!!! Tucker Max status up in the building. :smt077

 

Exactly, how do we define intelligence, let alone race?

As I said in my first post This has been the hubris of modern western thought for too long now, wanting to find or harness measurable cognitive ability

It seems she was making this statement in terms of having to live with Black people....."We are a problem and genetics might be the reason" seems the whole reason behind this e-mail.

Jared Diamond wrote a book based on the dominance of the European being happenstance and not genetic. Now we are questioning if Blacks running faster is genetic or societal?

Whatever the case may be, if there is a sprint in the Olympics and I was betting sheerly on "race" I know who I would bet on, and despite the work of the African historians, it's rather apparent that Black societies have been the laggards of human civilization for sometime now (I'm betting on the Asian school in math scores).

This all appears to be self-evident to me, but self-evidence is not science, nor are the examples I gave proof of determinative human traits. I'm not one of these racist eugenicist types who think everything is genetic, nor am I one of these we are all the same 99.999... percent crowd. There is nature vs nurture, and beyond, if one is to believe such things as DNA memory...etc.
I'm open to any and all possibilities, one being that our scientific methods are wrong.

The real problem is that this girl is not trying to discuss this from a genetic science point of view, but from a law/sociological point of view. This woman could be in the justice system making judgments on the lives of Black people based on her beliefs about their supposed inherent genetic predilections. The fact that she is even questioning whether crimes committed by Black people are some how genetic is a problem in of itself..

 

The sad part is, more than likely, there are a few people in the justice system that would find her theory reasonable.

 

I've been trying to figure out what her theory is exactly????

She concludes that the shift from "plantation docility" to "hood violence" is evidence of this so called nongentic shift. I wonder if she would ever hold White violence to the same standard of genetic or non genetic possibilities? I'm guessing she wouldn't hold enslavement and genocide as genetic traits of Whites; Black people don't get the benefit of doubt in possessing traits that are individual....

So now she is saying that there are counterarguments to her non-genetic shift claim, though she doesn't state them. Again, what are the variables? who is the we? and what is it we are controlling? Hopefully, it's not a control group of human beings she discussing.

If we are discussing her heart, it's possible that she feels in her heart that Black people are genetically prone to violence and while the "plantation docility nongentic shift" theory is something she wants to be true, it isn't. And so far at least, unsuccessfully, she's found nothing to counter the conclusion that Black people are genetically prone to violence.

Everyone can see this for what for it is. She is a textbook racist. That doesn't mean she hates Black people per se or didn't vote for Obama, but a person who feels unlawful acts like violence may be attributed to race should not be practicing law.

 

too bad you can't change that title to Harvard Law Woman....lol

 

yep they let Obamanist in

 

Hmmm let's see, Bush was a "legacy" placement who admittedly partied too much and barely passed. Obama was the editor of the law review during his time at Harvard, no comparison Tuckerreed..........

 

And he graduated Magna Cum Laude. Any comparison between Obama and Bush regarding their respective academic careers is farcical.

 

Comparing Obama to Bush is a total insult. At least BO speak very good English, LoL.

Anyways, does anyone have a link to BO's undergrad and grad transcript. Cant seem to find it.

 

As someone who grew up in an inner city, urban area, I can relate to why most African-Americans think this way.

No matter how small of a chance you have at being a professional athlete or entertainer, you have absolutely ZERO chance of being the chairman of a fortune 500 company. There are african-americans who were born with way more going for them than I did, yet you don't see any of them running large corporations either.

You are always going to have a large part of society who will think like this woman does. It won't matter how talented or gifted you are. President Obama at one time was also a Harvard law student. He was as gifted as she is. It doesn't matter. Many people like her think your GENES have a lot to do with how gifted you are, what kind of FAMILY you come from.

An INNER city kid has a much better chance at sports or entertainment than he/she ever would in a corporate board room. That is of course if you don't mind being like a J C WATTS or a MICHEAL STEELE, the kind of black person who is a shell of a man. If you can swallow your diginity and self respect then you can be like those men.

 

lol, you are throwing out a soft ball with that one

 

That's because he is a Muslim sleeper agent.

 

I strongly disagree. We as a people can make manufacture and market products to our own people. Things that are unique to us like sneakers, why are there no black owned sneaker companies. Atheletes that look like us promote the hell out of that shit but its money that only goes to white owned corporations. We are a community of people with incredibly low self esteem. The institution of slavery has done such a number on the minds of people of African descent and their offspring. So much so that things don't seem worth it unless you start at the top. Everyone wants to be lead but never wants to be led. The dumbest thing I heard growing up was always be a leader never follow anyone. What if the one trying to lead knows more than me? We are very capable of becoming CEOs of a fortune 500 company but we need to work for it. There were hundreds of years of oppression that created the idea that we are less than and need to be approved of in order to do what we want but that's bullshit. We are all the descendants of peasants fuck what you heard about us descending from Kings and Queens, those sold into slavery by their own African brothers and sisters were peasants. But who cares, any peasant can rise to power if he wants it bad enough, any slave can have freedom if he believes its his to have. So again I disagree with you, we can have what we want if we have the faith in ourselves to take it.

 

That was deep Andrae.....

 

Thanks IB I appreciate that